Search results

What Kamikaze said. The design tenet of adventure vs. encounter is not addressing just the "wizard and fighter in combat" issue. Shining does not necessarily mean being successful in a combat encounter. It also encompasses the rogue sneaking past the guards, or the bard singing to the king...

I think this goes without saying, but I am hoping that the current designers are at least thinking about this issue... I want to see 5E D&D Next last. I definitely understand that this will depend on sales figures, quantifiable success, the ups and downs of the market... But I would like to...

I like it. I was unnerved when I first heard "Skills as Feats that are called Traits," but I'm happier after reading this interpretation. I think this system makes sense when taken altogether, including all of the following: Skills picked "like feats" as part of your background Automatic...

Hautamaki brought up many of the solutions I would consider. It actually gives the DM a lot of freedom to decide what, exactly, is even considered an adventure. The idea is that the DM would hand out XP for more general accomplishments. "Clearing this dungeon," or "saving the princess." If...

I agree. Every option I see I would like to be transportable to a character that I design and build myself. One of my peeve's with the 4e Essentials line. If I wanted to switch out encounter spells, I had to go Mage, even though I preferred the original Wizard in all other respects. If I see...

I'm guessing there won't be any kind of NDA or electronic signature or even a sign up required. I am guessing it will be an open download, with a clause that says something to the effect of "This is an open beta playtest, and none of these rules may or may not ever see the light of day."

With that said, here's an idea. Not necessarily codified rules, but definitely some specific advice the DMG could offer. Let's say XP is given out per adventure, and the DM populates the entire adventure with a certain XP budget. The PCs can play through the adventure as designed and receive...

Firstly, I'm glad to see that D&D Next is going in this direction. In essence, "focusing on the adventure as the basic unit of DM design." Of course, Mearls hasn't gone into too much depth on how they will be accomplishing this when it comes to dailies, rests, crafting, and so on. I think...

I (for one) am glad Monte left. I recognize and respect his style, and his creativity, definitely. I just rarely agreed or appreciated his actual design work (from what I could glean from his 3e and Malhavoc days). His L&L articles always, always, left me feeling sick to my stomach. His...

I have not had to, personally, deal with an adversarial DM or with adversarial players. I have, however, dealt with games where the DM/players simply did not know how to do this, myself definitely included, be it from DMing for the first time, learning the new system, or playing D&D for the...

Implement. Implement. Implement. Besides scrolls, I do not want to see any other magic item used as solely a "spell container." I love the implement route, and would love to see the return of wands, staves, and orbs. (And hopefully tomes, too!)

The issue of "balance" has been an ongoing one for several editions. Although perhaps it should not be the primary, overriding concern, it is nonetheless important to creating an enjoyable, consistent, and long-term game. Everything from "bloat" to "feat tax" to skyrocketing skill modifiers...

I am beginning to see your difference in meaning of prose versus fluff. In that case, I would personally, definitely, lean toward the "Excel" version. What I would like to see in 5E, though, is a more condensed version of the statistical block for spells, with a simultaneous enlargement of the...

Although I agree that the individual "flavorlessness" of powers and spells is less inspirational and makes it harder to engage with, I think the amount of fluff in 4E outweight 3E/Pathfinder, in some respects. Of course, all this is based on my fuzzy memory and impressions, so please bear with...

Didn't Dante always go left?

Not only kudos to WotC on the Target, price-point, newbie friendly thang, but also their timeline. Rolling out Essentials, in its current form and how its been presented, would have been impossible with the release of 4E. They needed a couple-few years to work out the kinks, find out what...

D&D Essentials is 4.5E only if... PHB3 and Psionics was 4.3E PHB2 was 4.1E, and each errata is another 0.0.1E I'd rather just say it's all 4E, with the ability to seamlessly incorporate variants.

So, it's definitely not 4.5.... It actually looks more like 3.9E.

I love reskinning/reflavoring. I like the idea of a magic-infused all-human campaign, where the diknown fferent races are actually just uniquely touched humans, almost superhero-esque. "Dwarf" or "Gnome" are not known races, but every once in a while a human is born with those traits. It cuts...

My only piece of advice is to not go too overboard. Double-crosses are great, but one huge, unexpected double cross amidst several NPCs that the characters know to trust is going to go a lot further than everyone the characters meet stabbing them in the back.